Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may be moderated.
HAPPY NEW YEAR.
Free the BBC.
Sorry about the broken link:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/5203690003280206318/#378655
Yes, Happy New Year to everyone.
My take on the BBC :
It’s my belief that Islam, a highly prescriptive religion, teaches that Muslims should lie to infidels whenever it suits the interests of their religion to do so and sign any treaties with them with fingers crossed behind their backs (it also teaches that the death of an infidel as a matter of no importance, but that is a little too inflammatory for legal public discourse). If the BBC would only give these self evident facts at least the beneft of the doubt I would have little argument with them.
It seems the critics of the BBC on this site seem to take issue with:
1/ The corporation’s attitude towards global warming
2/The BBC’s anti-Israel bias
3/Their excessive indulgence of Muslims and more generally overly politically correct attitude.
4/Their anti-Americanism, or at least anti-Bushism.
On 1 can only say that it is a case of shooting the messenger: the conventional wisdom is that global warming exists and is largely a product of human activity. The truth is that for years, Radio 4’s flagship environmental programme ‘Costing the earth’ had as a resident commentator some Yorkshireman, whose name I forget, who used to drive virtually everyone else who appeared on the show (including the presenter) up the wall because of his scepticism about global warming. Even now, on Radio 5, the weatherman John Hedgely expresses doubts about global warming if anyone bothers to ask him his views on the subject.
2/As regards the BBC’s anti-Israel bias, I’m old enough to remember the daily reports to BBC news of Eric Silver, the BBC’s correspondent in Jerusalem which Private Eye used to excoriate for their totally pro-Israeli line.The change seemed to take place in the early 80’s when the Israelis invaded southern Lebanon and bombed Beirut. After that for reasons best known to themselves the corporation seemed to take the attitude that the Israelis were bullies and don’t seem to have diverged from that attitude ever since, possibly for reasons of institutional inertia. Part of the reason for this I think has to do with item 3.
3/ The BBC cannot bring themselves to face the fact that Islam is a tacky religion, totally full of BS, that has expanded over the years by using methods that would be familiar to members of the Mafia / Nazi party. It presents a facade of sexual propriety (something of immense importance to people of a religious persuasion) by means of routine violence, often of an extreme nature. Because it cannot handle something as pre-mediaeval as this, the corporation treats it as though it is like Christianity and consequently has the wool pulled over its eyes and all but baas like some confused sheep confronted with a wolf when all it has known is the safety of is fellow woolybacks. To see a British national institution played like a violin by a bunch of people who lie to non-Muslims on principle and regard those among whom they live with contempt, despite the fact that their contribution towards human progress for at least the last half-millenium has been non-existent, is truly dismaying. The way that the corporation’s foreign correspondents seem to go native when oposted to Muslim countries would seem to be a mixed problem of suggestibiliy, mental health and amorality on the part of the people they live among. When Lyse Doucet predicts tht in 2008 the US will have to negotiate with the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Iranians and thinks that this is an eminently sensible think to do, then things have reaches a pretty disastrous disconnect with reality.
As regards 4, BBC anti-Americanism: it was virtually non existent when Clinton was president. Electing people whom every European would tend to regard, for deep cultural reasons, as an idle buffoon who talks religious claptrap and makes unfortunate decisions is not a great way to endear yourselves to others.
Marista Leishman claims her father respected Hitler and Mussolini and adopted some of the principles espoused by the German chancellor in the running of the BBC.
Hah! Straight from al-horse’s mouth! Maybe we should start calling them ReichsBeeb instead of Al-Beeb?
BTW, Happy New Year everyone!
. Meanwhile, can everyone out there monitor BBC news programmes for the number of times the phrase “The Conservatives” is used to begin a news report, in which some statement by the Cameron Party is treated with respect? This sort of thing was unthinkable three years ago, when the Tories were lucky to get mentioned at all. They were never the subject of the sentence, unless they were embroiled in a scandal or a quarrel, and they were never referred to with respect or regard. In those days they usually used to find themselves in what is called a ‘sandwich’ in the broadcasting trade. The New Labour version would be set out by a government spokesman, the Tories would be given a few seconds to respond, and the reporter would then reiterate the New Labour version, attributing it to unnamed “Government sources”. How I long for the money and resources to do a proper analysis of broadcasting bias.
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2007/12/tory-lead-colla.html
Happy 2008 everyone (even John Reith). Nothing like starting the year by reading a few HYS threads in the order of “readers recommended”. The Bhutto thread is particularly good.
Alan
I denounce you as a blind fool and a mindless bigot.
What is wrong with you people. Do you only what to communicate with yourselves and John Reith?
Do you not want any type of comments other then ones that fit your tidy little one sided blinkered concepts?
Do you not see you are all products of BBC divisive divide and rule propaganda?
I am not only Jewish I am a Zionist myself. I have not only family living in Israel virtually every friend and business college I know also does.
However unlike you I know the truth and like a good Jew I see both sides of an argument. You don’t even understand one side properly.
I am also a REAL CONSERVATIVE, and a lifetime party activist. Its not my fault the MSM and the BBC has permanently messed up your minds. To the point that virtually none of you even know what a Conservative is supposed to believe.
I may even be a member of the organization that I was hinting at. But on that subject I could not possibly comment.
It shocks me to read so much crap come from people that profess to be educated. You mostly know nothing about Israel or Israeli people. However your depth of ignorence and bigotry towards my Muslim brothers is almost indescribable.
I can see the BBC has done a very good job on you all.
I must have missed something, but when did “conservative” become a perjorative in BBC terms?
“Tory” is the preferred perjorative.
If the policy is something the BBC approves of, like “tackling climate change” then the policy is from the “Conservatives”. If the policy is something the BBC doesn’t like (usually attacking the Government or Gordon Brown) then they are “Tories”.
Happy Hogmanay – thank Gawd we don’t have the White Heather Club on BBC1 every New Year nowadays…..about the only good thing I can say about the BBC is that they took that load of rubbish awa’ and buried it deep!
Biodegradable’s Ghost…..Happy Haunting!
A New Year’s Resolution needed to be adopted by Beeboids:
‘I RESOLVE NOT TO SPOUT THE USUAL VACUOUS MULTICULTURALISM, AS IT IS A COVER FOR IGNORANCE’
See Mark Steyn 8 min video:
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/12/31/steyn-multiculti-is-a-cult-of-ignorance/
What is it about Radio 4 (anyone but the English)’s obsession about the suicide rate inside prison?
They never mention the suicide rate in the general population, or say amongst young men in general. Only the rate inside gaol.
Most important (for them of course) is the suicide rate of foreigners inside British prisons.
All suicides are sad, but why does the BBC think only suicides in prison are worthy of their agenda?
Wally
“… the conventional wisdom is that global warming exists and is largely a product of human activity… ”
Wally, are you not even mildly sceptical of the climate change/global warming consensus as peddled by the BBC?
Catastrophic global warming has not been proven. That GW is caused by human activity is STILL very much disputed in the scientific community, the Beeb having done very little to make us fully aware of this.
Remember the seventies, when the big scare was global cooling, the ice caps advancing towards North America/Europe? They got it wrong then and there’s no reason to believe they haven’t got it wrong again.
There is little doubt that this whole GW nonsense is used as a convenient excuse by the usual left-wing suspects to restrict lifestyle choices and attack free market economies.
I agree we should move away from reliance on finite resources, dependence on energy sources from the Middle East and Russia giving undue power to unstable regimes that despise our way of life.
The most practical, reliable and secure alternative to fossil fuels is nuclear power. It even satisfies the green demands for low C02 emissions. That they oppose this, despite it being a solution to so many of their concerns, clearly indicates that the motives of the Greenpeace/BBC losers are anti-capitalist rather than anti-C02.
Happy new year.
What a start to the new year! Dear Leader reports that tractor production in the Urals is at record levels and the Beeb approves:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7166429.stm
Okay, it has just cribbed this crap from the press releases on the Pravda website:
http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page14103.asp
http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page14104.asp
Why bother with this guff?
“… the conventional wisdom is that global warming exists and is largely a product of human activity… “
A look at the people who are pushing this idea will tell you all you need to know about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qui_bono
Scrap the licence fee. Keep Salford BBC free.
“If the policy is something the BBC approves of, like “tackling climate change” then the policy is from the “Conservatives”. If the policy is something the BBC doesn’t like (usually attacking the Government or Gordon Brown) then they are “Tories”.”
The BBC is progressive down to the last person,irrespective of race, creed or sexual preference.Progressive being newspeak for socialist.Liberal is also co-opted but has as much to do with classical liberalism as Stalin.
Conservatives,small c large C are absolute anathema to progressives,the word conservative is used as the pejorative. Watch the curl on the lip of the hereditary Dimbleby as he says “conservative.”
Note that the term is conservatives not Conservative Party,strangely the BBC never says labours,only ever Labour Party.
Yes, Tory is also pejorative,these are graduates,they have been trained in bias by experts.
You have to study the use of language as a political tool,because they have.
Another poor, biased BBC report from Sudan on the MURDER ( a word not mentioned in BBC report) of AMERICAN diplomat and driver in Khartoum.
There is no mention of the pervasive ISLAMIC JIHAD in Sudan, instead we have this insulting final comment:
“Anti-Western and anti-US feelimgs are running high in Sudan, because of Western criticism of Khartoum’s policies in Darfur, correspondents say.” The sort of weasel words we expect from the BBC on these occasions.Disgusting.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7166902.stm
All the JRs
The JR that avoids defending allegations of the Beeb’s fundamental anti-Israel bias by pulling out another trump card, contending that Israel was created reluctantly from political expediency not altruism. He exposes his own attitude, nothing more. Because as Alan says, Israel exists.
For the last forty years the BBC has thought fit to drip feed us with its relentless demonisation of Israel so now the average educated English person, having absorbed this poisonous view, believes that: Israel is bullying, expansionist, genocidal, perpetrates ethnic cleansing, massacres, murders of children and babies, is Arab hating, apartheid practicing, Christian oppressing, warmongering, and armed and funded by US through the Jewish lobby.
This attitude has been absorbed by people here who think it is their duty to speak out loudly against the injustices they have been handed on a plate. Even after the exposure of recent trivial deceptions they see no reason to ask questions – why should they? They ‘know.’
Coupled with the increasingly outrageous whitewashing of the cultural incompatibilities that are dividing the U.K. we seem to have been plunged into a surreal hell in which black is white and good is evil.
Are all the JRs going to keep avoiding this theme or do they collectively believe the BBC’s line but don’t want to admit to having racist tendencies?
Own up, at least one of you damned JRs.
Can one of you at least answer the questions about the way the reporting of the Gaza border issues are distorted?
Why is Jeremy Bowen thought to be capable of being the BBC’s chief Middle East correspondent when he so lacks credibility?
And we now learn that the original John Reith was a rabid anti-Semite. How appropriate that this lot should take his name as their pseudonym.
“”Anti-Western and anti-US feelimgs are running high in Sudan, because of Western criticism of Khartoum’s policies in Darfur, correspondents say.”
So if the “West” stops criticising genocide they will stop killing us?
Seems fair,sorry Darfur,you have to take one for the team.
Hi David,
I think the point I am trying to make is that the BBC is that the BBC is cultural inured in the language and motivations of the gay rights movement. Its (non)treatment of, say, the Nigel Wrench homosexual rape case vs. the Andy Kershaw ex-girlfriend harassment case, to name but one.
Now, this might seem paradoxical, as the BBC is also pro-Islamist, and Islamists tend to want to do to homosexuals what civilised Christian Western countries stopped doing to convicted murderers 500 years ago, but the liberal establishment is full of paradoxes.
In the case of Kevin Greening, the BBC now seem to have completely skipped over the fact that Mr Greening was a practising homosexual. I suspect that it’s because the words “Class A drugs” are now being mentioned in relation to the case, and anything that exposes the dark and destructive nature of the gay scene needs to be brushed over. Especially given that Mr Greening was such a lovely man.
Now, if Mr Greening had been beaten up for soliciting sodomy on Hampstead Heath, there’s little doubt in my mind that the matter of his homosexuality would have been at the forefront of the matter, and the word “homophobia” would have been bandied about ad-nauseam, with much hand-wringing about bigotry and hatred.
In fact, the fact that the BBC is both pro-gay and pro-Islamist may seem paradoxical, but really it’s not. The BBC hates Britain, hates the West and hates Christianity. Both the gay agenda and the Islamist agenda are out to destroy Western civilisation in their own ways, through attacking the moral and social fabric, the family and Christianity, through “hate speech” crimes which prevent us from defending ourselves, and so on. In other words, “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”.
Steve Edwards,
Gramsci,Foucault and the Frankfurt School.The Marxists gave up on the revolution and engaged in the cultural revolution,the pillars of Western Society have been deliberately undermined.Country,religion,sexuality,the family,right and wrong,good and bad,legality and criminality all perverted or inverted. Check it against the realities of modern society,see if it strikes a chord.
Academia is riddled with this sort of thinking,is it any wonder that the products of these halls of learning infest the BBC? What better cover than the respectable old Auntie Beeb?
PeterUK
Does all this sound familiar? All these things were promoted by the KGB’s ideological infiltration and subversion unit:
From the Naked Communist (Cleon Skousen)
Noted in U.S. Congressional Record on January 10, 1963
Current Communist Goals:
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.”
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
Steve Edwards
“In fact, the fact that the BBC is both pro-gay and pro-Islamist may seem paradoxical, but really it’s not. The BBC hates Britain, hates the West and hates Christianity.”
The Beeb have done plenty on promoting homosexuality and Islam separately. Fair enough, it should now bring the two together and do an in-depth documentary on homosexuality in Islam.
It might turn out to be a useful weapon against radical Islam!
As an example of what Muslim queers are up against see 4th paragraph onwards:
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/research/rir/?action=record.viewrec&gotorec=433735
Steve Edwards: I’ve made this very same point here before. How can any organisation that has such a high number of homsexuals working within it also be so pro a religion that wants to hang them from crane jibs?
Channel 4 used to be very pro Islam a few years back. But a TV Documentary done by Jon Snow where he went around in his usual liberal way interviewing young British Muslims and seemed very surprised by their anti homosexual attitude. Since that documentary (about 2 1/2 years ago I think it was) Channel 4 has clearly had a very negative agenda towards Islam. Are the two related?
Just ask yourself this. When was the last time the BBC carried ANY I repeat ANY documentary that looked at the so called “moderate” Muslims in the UK and their attitude to things like alcohol, homosexuality and the like?
In the recent BBC garbage Arrange (or force) me a marriage how come the BBC didn’t have two homosexuals included? normally the BBC likes to get the “Gay” agenda into every TV show (even poor old Dr Who).
How about the writers of Eastenders having two gay Muslims in it? There is about as much chance of the BBC doing that as there is the BBC of giving David Cameron decent air time.
For followers of the Global warming debate see this from 4th January 2007
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6228765.stm
2007 to be ‘warmest on record’.
The met office website today 1st Jan says that up to 30th December (latest figures) http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cet_info_mean.html
The highest annual mean CET recorded is 10.82 which is 1.35 higher than normal. To beat this record the anomaly must be higher than 121.72 for the remainder of the year. So the 31st December had to be 121.72 degrees above normal to be the ‘Warmest year on record’
Remember that in the coming days.
Martin,
Slightly OT, but I know a number of people who despise Christians for their views on homosexuality and abortion, yet actively cultivate relations with Muslims.
Given that pro-gay secular Britain is having children at the rate of 1.6 children per woman, and will therefore be half the size in two generations, and anti-gay Muslims are having children at the rate of 5 per woman, and therefore will be three times the size in two generations, it’s clear which view will predominate.
I’d invest in the mobile crane business if I were you. Or do what the wealthy liberal latte Marxists have done, and leave the country.
It’s like a scene from Spartacus…
“I am John Reith!”
“I am John Reith!”
“I am John Reith!”
and so on throughout the fluffy towers at the Beeb… er, except they won’t speak us as individuals.
One last thought, Mr Reiths(s): “Behind the pseudonym John Reith are indeed several people valiantly defending BBC against the unfounded accusations of bias.” So it would seem… but there’s no one there who is prepared to try and answer any of the many well-founded accusations of bias. Still, why bother to defend the indefensible, eh lads and lassies? You will all still get paid whatever the tripe, so it hardly matters about the muppets paying your salaries and expenses via an unjustified tax.
Just for the record, I’m not conservative by any stretch. I’m also a staunch atheist.
So the two faced approach to homosexuality and women rights by the Left in general and BBC in particular never ceases to amaze me.
For example, BBC doesn’t find it paradoxical to support Hamas and Hezbollah with clearly reactionary views on these issues. All the while denouncing Israel, with openly gay officers in the army, gay common law partnerships and marriages recognized by law, etc.
What kind of message are they sending to the Islamic world!? That it is OK to be mysogenic and anti-gay.
So it is not really true that the Left supports “universal rights” and universal liberal values.
The question as to why it is so has baffled me for a while and I came to the conclusion that the word “universal” holds the key.
I now believe that most of the European Left and especially the snobbish BBC are deep down racists in denial.
The only explanation for demanding one set of behavioral rules and values from the West and another one (and much more lenient) from various Islamic countries – is that the European Left, now filled with the old European “elites” (like the original John Reith) is deeply racist.
They still see the third view as little children and monkeys who are allowed to behave like savages.
That is because in European Left’s bigoted view, only the West can be and is really progressive.
That racist and elitist world view explains why they adamantly claim that the Islamists are only reacting to Western provocations. As if 1.5 billion people are mindless dogs with no possible motivations of their own.
The racist attitude explains why it is the Americans that are to blame for the carnage in Iraq in the past several years, and not Al-Qaeda who does all the killing and torture.
This Euro-centric racism is now predominantly realm of the Left (after fascism of the right was defeated).
That is why Edward Said’s ramblings and various of forms of cultural and moral relativism found such fertile ground in the Left.
They simply fit a still racist, but now post-colonial view of the world in which only the West needs to be upheld to the highest moral standards, while the rest of the world does not.
I’m afraid that it will take a generation, not ridden by this lingering racism and post-colonial guilt, to see these simple truths about their parents.
They will not understand how could their parents possibly defend people that publicly stone raped women as punishment for adultery.
Do you think, by the way, there is a “Master” John Reith (perhaps like Davros in the Dr Who series) who barks orders at the lesser JRs about their valiant attempts to patch over the cracks in the edifice?
“Great master,” squeaks one, “I have prepared a cutting rejection of the criticism we are all pro-Islam, pro-left, pro-MMGW and anti just about everything else that matters to people, shall I post it?”
“Does it make sense?” Roars the mighty Davros JR.
“No! That would be against everything we believe, O mighty one.”
“Then publish!”
And we have the answers we seek.
Bluebirds…good one! Bet JR is not as good looking as Davros thought!
Dear Chris,
I wouldnt put too much faith in those met office figures if I were you!
They have been blindly trying to follow the ‘consensus’ for a while now.
Those ‘experts’ have enough trouble predicting the next days weather! We seem to get these stories from them from time to time and I remember just recently that they tried to put out the ridiculous story about inventing some kind of wonder computer program that could predict the weather/climate for years into the future, needless to say the story was soon pulled as it was a planted story with no basis in reality.
If you can be bothered to look at the fine print you will see that their figures are biased to avg max temps(gained from city based censors). Using ground based equipment in built up areas will always give higher max temperatures. If you look at the real figures from NASA using space based sensors that avoid problems like the ‘heat island effect’ and disregard dishonest methods that the met office use you find a different picture emerges.
In reality the met office are well and truly shackled to the AGW/MMGW bandwaggon and because of their undoubted reputation of getting their weather predictions utterly wrong I would not trust them if they told me that it gets dark at night!
Dont you find it at all odd that a government department will come up with figures that support government policy?
Instead of swallowing the propaganda hook line and sinker may I suggest you open your mind and find out the real facts?
I see that the BBC have not turned over a new leaf with their coverage of UK politics. Their UK politics home page is showing as top “Kenyan violence must end – Brown
Gordon Brown renews his plea for Kenya’s political leaders to enter talks aimed at ending the violence.” Positive view of Gordon Brown….As usual the BBC are shilling for their masters in the Labour party. After the debacle of 2007, the plan is to boost Gordon Brown’s image and to denigrate David Cameron and the Conservatives image wherever possible.
Steve Edwards: Sorry, was I being too subtle? I meant to say that it’s just nice that gay men like yourself can speak so freely on B-BBC.
Indeed I think the support of gay rights on B-BBC is one of the best thing about this website.
Of course I would say that as a brainwashed beeboid!
But still, more power to you!
Hi David,
Here’s a question for you, see if you can answer it.
The BBC’s “Diversity Statement” states that the BBC is proud of the fact that it has staff that engage in homosexual acts. It even names some of them.
Tell me, how can an organisation that takes pride in its staff behaving in such a way claim, let alone achieve, balance or fairness in its treatment of the most profound cultural and social issues that face our society?
How can it report fairly and honestly on religion, morality, marital issues, adoption law, the family, sexual health, social policy, family law, pro-family movements and individuals and the homosexualist movement itself?
Thanks in advance.
Cassandra
Re: my 8.14 post
Have you never heard of Irony?
Dr David Gregory
“Indeed I think the support of gay rights on B-BBC is one of the best thing about this website.
Of course I would say that as a brainwashed beeboid!
But still, more power to you!”
You are missing the point. Nobody’s really said anything about “support of gay rights”, but rather the paradoxical support given by the BBC to homosexuality and Islam. A little strange, yes?
Oh come now Greggers old chap,don;t belittle yourself so,I’m sure no brainwashing was required.
“Let’s not get too bogged down in the details. We are not here to improve our English.”
No, BUT let’s keep in mind that the use of language is central to discussion here in away that it would be in few other forums.
People scrutinize the output of the BBC in great detail – many here pursuing agendas centred on Middle East politics rather than on broadcasting in the UK; some quite rightly nailing journalists who don’t appear to know the difference between Britons and Brtish residents, for example.
But the bottom line here is that people like “Cassandra” who aren’t at ease expressing themselves in writing are identifying themselves as not qualified to debate the nuances of the language.
I drive a car. I could get into a truck and probably start it, but (legal issues apart) I’d make a complete fool of myself if I tried to
take it anywhere.
I’m genuinely sorry for people nursing grievances about their education from decades ago and with chips on their shoulder about people with double-barrelled names. (My real name isn’t, and didn’t it strike you that “Tmompson-Gunner” is a pretty
unlikely surname?)
As I pointed out earlier, you’re probably a Warren zevon fan.
Now, guess where my name comes from…
Seriously, I agree it’s sad that some people nurse those grievances about their education. Don’t let it get you down, people. We all have to shell out for the Beeb’s skewed output, so an entire range of input is needed on this site, from “left school at 14, barely able to write” to “I have a drawer full of degree certificates”.
Oh, stop gunning for Cassandra, Roland. You are being pretty damn mean-spirited. She’s mentioned that she is dyslexic, but despite that disability her English is fine. I have no problem understanding her.
And you really should stop flogging this dead horse of an “argument” of yours. If you maintain that somebody who omits apostrophes cannot reliably detect BBC bias then maybe you should tell us exactly what standard of English you feel is required before one is qualified to detect bias.
You made an error in the second sentence of your comment. Maybe we should therefore regard everything you have said here as invalid.
Naming yourself “Roland (The Headless) Thompson-Gunner” hardly inspires confidence in your literary accomplishments.
B-BBC: I knew nothing about how important the battle for gay rights in Iran was until I came here. Obviously I was wrong, should I contact Birmingham’s local crane operators?
PS Peter: So many semicolons, so little time.
James Reynolds pretended to report on the upcoming Olympics in China today on the World Service. He asked a group of Chinese why they were so excited about the Olympics because “It’s just people running around and swimming.” I kid you not, he actually said that. Then he let a woman sound off at length about refusing to accept compensation for her restaurant, which is in the way of some Olympics-related construction.
So here’s a question for John Reith once he’s got over his New Year’s Eve hangover:
Why the hell do we have to be subjected to the juvenile ramblings of alleged journalists when the BBC could quite easily employ somebody with some knowledge of his/her subject and the ability to impart it to the public, and with some idea of the responsibility a journalist has towards the public?
And here’s a related question:
Do these “journalists” really think that the public at large is impressed by being subjected to their ignorant, rebellious, adolescent observations?
The BBC could pick anyone up off the street, give them a square meal and a ticket to China and they would produce a better report than this one.
Roland
“But the bottom line here is that people like “Cassandra” who aren’t at ease expressing themselves in writing are identifying themselves as not qualified to debate the nuances of the language.”
Like Bryan I also have absolutely no problem understanding Cassandra. You sound like a real elitist snob. We are here to talk about BBC bias, not the discerning placement of apostrophes.
EVERYBODY can have a piece of the action on blogs like these, inarticulate and wordy freaks alike. Get over it and get over yourself.
“No, BUT let’s keep in mind that the use of language is central to discussion here in away that it would be in few other forums. ”
Please also keep in mind that anemic pedants like yourself ought to get out more.
David Gregory: lets face it, you wouldn’t find out about the hanging of homosexuals in Iran from the BBC would you?
After all you leftie losers think I’m a Dinner Jacket is a great man for sticking it to Uncle Sam.
PATHETIC.
David Gregory,
Your sarcasm is misplaced.
Maybe you would have known about abuses of gays in Iran, but none of the BBC viewers would.
For reasons I have tried to explain in my previous post you seem to believe that gay rights are good for the Western societies but not for the third world primitives.
If you are gay and/or pretend to be pro gay-rights, then, mister you are a fake.
Explain it to me, why is there virtually no coverage on human rights abuses in Muslim countries.
Here in Canada a lot was published about an Iranian Canadian human rights activist that was tortured to death in Tehran’s prison. Not a peep from the BBC?
Why? WHY?
Alan: Please. Some of my best friends are Canadian
David Gregory:
“Please. Some of my best friends are Canadian”
I don’t get it, if your only response to all comments is smug sarcasm, why bother to answer?
Or for that matter to read this board at all?
David Gregory:
PS – A better fit for your ilk would be to really say “Some of my best friends are Jewish”.
But you are too smart to ever say a thing like that, are you?
But your subconscious mind categorized me as a Jew based on my previous comments, so the sentence popped up in you mind – right?